From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from smtp.gentoo.org (smtp.gentoo.org [134.68.220.30]) by robin.gentoo.org (8.13.3/8.13.3) with ESMTP id j27JQV53029524 for ; Mon, 7 Mar 2005 19:26:31 GMT Received: from griffon26.demon.nl ([82.161.57.89] helo=griffon26.kfk4ever.com) by smtp.gentoo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.42) id 1D8Ns5-00007o-GG for gentoo-dev@robin.gentoo.org; Mon, 07 Mar 2005 19:26:29 +0000 Received: by griffon26.kfk4ever.com (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 4B27FA0027A; Mon, 7 Mar 2005 20:24:15 +0100 (CET) Date: Mon, 7 Mar 2005 20:24:15 +0100 From: Maurice van der Pot To: gentoo-dev@robin.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] GLEP 29 (USE groups) and negatives Message-ID: <20050307192415.GA23754@kfk4ever.com> Mail-Followup-To: gentoo-dev@gentoo.org References: <20050306162849.247c8c8f@snowdrop> Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-dev@gentoo.org Reply-To: gentoo-dev@gentoo.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="OXfL5xGRrasGEqWY" Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20050306162849.247c8c8f@snowdrop> X-PGP-Key: http://www.kfk4ever.com/~griffon26/pubkey.asc X-URL: http://www.kfk4ever.com/ X-Archives-Salt: 15f18035-2e7b-4201-a80e-9430b93dc141 X-Archives-Hash: fe9eb4daaf59c0b1bc6fe94d704759ee --OXfL5xGRrasGEqWY Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Sun, Mar 06, 2005 at 04:28:49PM +0000, Ciaran McCreesh wrote: > http://www.gentoo.org/proj/en/glep/glep-0029.html >=20 > We need to decide upon a solution to the -flags problem. The proposed > solutions are: >=20 > 1) Disallow all negatives. Disadvantages: we don't tend to disallow > things just because users could shoot themselves in the foot with them. >=20 > 2) Allow negatives, and document how to use them correctly. > Disadvantages: sooner or later, some developer isn't going to read the > docs, and will really really screw things up with a misunderstanding. >=20 =2E.. > > 5) Use some weird tristate notation. Disadvantages: not everyone has the > slightest clue what set theory is. 'some weird tristate notation' must be what I proposed previously. =3D) I'm still convinced that the use of it would be easy, both for developers and for users, but I do acknowledge some (minor) issues like finding another usable character for the new notation. The last time I tried to explain my proposal, everybody except myself seemed to think it was complicated, so I will not try to promote it anymore, it's in the archives already. > I'm in favour of 2) personally, but others disagree. I'd like a proper > discussion on this before trying to get the GLEP through. What I am still missing is a good argument _FOR_ negatives. We are talking about negatives within groups, right? I agree with you that if we choose 2, sooner or later it's going to get screwed up. We must have a better reason for allowing them than just the off chance that negatives= =20 might be useful in a way we cannot forsee yet. If there is such a reason, I'd also pick 2. Maurice. --=20 Maurice van der Pot Gentoo Linux Developer griffon26@gentoo.org http://www.gentoo.org Creator of BiteMe! griffon26@kfk4ever.com http://www.kfk4ever.com --OXfL5xGRrasGEqWY Content-Type: application/pgp-signature Content-Disposition: inline -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.0 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQFCLKpfMGnpIbeahxwRAggcAKCHCTgyfECUetGQHkfMd5aRzPLm3ACgoleR Ja2YnBl8ef1odAF0EsONcG8= =RbwG -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --OXfL5xGRrasGEqWY-- -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list